- Email: [email protected]
Agency and conformity in school-based teacher training
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 1401–1412 www.elsevier.com/locate/tate
Agency and conformity in school-based teacher training Jon Roberts, Suzanne Graham Institute of Education, University of Reading, Bulmershe Court, Earley, Reading RG6 1HY, UK Received 23 July 2007; received in revised form 1 December 2007; accepted 14 January 2008
Abstract Concern has been expressed that the current climate in schools militates against trainee teachers’ self-directed development. This article explores the issue of trainees’ capacity for self-direction through the analysis of interviews with 32 trainees, investigating their perceived proactive social strategies. Three proactive strategies were identified: ‘tactical compliance’, personalising advice, and seeking out opportunities to exercise control. It is argued that these strategies are indicative of trainees’ drive to establish a personal teaching identity through self-directed development and the creation of individual development agendas. The article concludes by emphasising the importance of the development of proactive social skills in beginning teachers. r 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Keywords: Agency; School culture; Teacher trainee; Teacher socialisation; Self-directed development
My mentor would give me things and I could pick and try out what works for me yteaching is so personal that you do need to know your own priorities or own beliefs, who you are I suppose, to be able to use your [course] to the best, to make it effective. (Zena)
1. Introduction The principal form of pre-service teacher education in England and Wales is the Post-Graduate Certificate of Education (PGCE). This is a 36-week course, during which trainee teachers’ time is divided between input from the Higher Education Institute (HEI) to which they are attached and school-based practical teaching. The school-based Corresponding author. Tel.: +44 1189 265 642.
E-mail address: [email protected] (J. Roberts).
element of the course includes, typically, a ‘serial’ placement, where trainees spend part of the week in the HEI and part of the week in school, and a ‘main block’ placement, where they are in school 5 days a week for several weeks and teaching relatively independently. In addition, the school-based element has to amount to at least 120 days and to be spent in at least two different schools in order for trainees to have a broad experience (DfE, 1992). These requirements are specified by central government and overseen by non-governmental agencies, the Training and Development Agency (TDA) and Office for Standards in Education (OFSTED). Schools themselves are subject to the imperatives of successful curriculum delivery (Edwards & Protheroe, 2004) and rigorous inspection enforces standards of teaching competence (DfEE, 1998, 2002). It therefore seems likely that trainees’ experiences are also going to be subject to forces of conformity and centralisation. Indeed, concerns
0742-051X/$ - see front matter r 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2008.01.003
ARTICLE IN PRESS 1402
J. Roberts, S. Graham / Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 1401–1412
have been voiced that contemporary conditions of professional socialisation inhibit trainees’ self-directed development. For example, Edwards and Protheroe (2003) argue that the demand for results pushes mentors to impose ‘‘proxy teaching’’ on trainees. It is even suggested that trainees’ efforts to become self-directing may be penalised: Does a student who chooses the path of selfrealisation risk losing the support of those in a position to enforce cultural obedience? (Editorial, 2001, p.7) In the light of these concerns, the purpose of this article is to explore ways, if any, in which a small sample of trainees saw themselves as having influenced their own development by being socially proactive in their relations with school staff. 1.1. Perspectives on professional socialisation Teacher socialisation research has tended to emphasize structural, external influences on individuals as they become a member of the teaching community. Research does indicate that the institutional environment has a profound impact on teachers’ professional development (Hodkinson & Hodkinson, 2002; Vulliamy & Yeh, 1998; Wu, 1998), and that teaching tasks, student behaviour, school culture and occupational culture operate powerfully to affect teachers’ thinking and practice (Zeichner, Tabachnik & Densmore, 1987). Many studies have indicated that trainees develop their professional identity through their relationships with staff (Brown, Doecke, & Loughran 1997; Hargreaves, 1995), and that trainees, as powerless newcomers, have an overriding need for security and inclusion in the school community (McNally, Cope, Inglis & Stronach, 1994; Zeichner & Gore, 1990). They do this by fitting in (Jones, 2005; Olson & Osbourne, 1991) and avoiding confrontations with powerful staff, of whom the mentor is seen as most crucial to their survival (Chambers, Coles & Roper, 2002; Dart & Drake 1993). Some researchers (Edwards & Protheroe, 2003; Maynard, 2001) view external influences on trainees from the perspective of situated learning theory (Lave & Wenger, 1991; Wenger, 1998). This is a view in which: Learners appropriate the meanings and actions used by more expert members of the practice community through a process of peripheral
participation and eventually become fully fledged members. (Edwards & Protheroe, 2003, p. 228) However, Hodkinson and Hodkinson (2002) question the relevance to schools of this perspective, in that it is a theory of apprenticeship in occupationally homogeneous contexts. They argue that this context contrasts with the circumstances of trainees, whose interactions take place in departments that are non-monolithic in nature: departments and schools are open systems in which individuals are influenced by external ideas and pressures. Furthermore, as Hodkinson & Hodkinson suggest, interpersonal processes in schools are multi-directional rather than simply from centre to periphery, from the senior teacher to the novice. Such diversity enables a degree of personally directed development. Similarly, Hodges’ (1998) study of trainees’ dis-identification arising from negative experiences challenged the assumption that participation will proceed from peripheral to central participation. In another context, novice accountants, Grey’s (1994) study also suggested that there can be space for trainees to develop within social structures. Lacey (1977) categorised trainees’ social strategies in schools as promoting conformity (internalised adjustment), passive self-maintenance (strategic compliance), and influencing others to change their interpretations of events (strategic redefinition). He recognised the potential of strategic redefinition to contribute to structural change, but did not explore its personal developmental consequences. Exploration of trainees’ self-directing strategies since then has been scant. In one of the few studies of trainees’ proactive actions, Gratch (2001, p. 6) suggested that in order for trainee teachers to benefit from ‘‘opportunities for agency within the structure of schools’’ the former needed to ‘‘develop skills in order to take advantage of these agentic moments’’. Whether trainees are able to develop such skills is the subject of this article. It considers the participants’ accounts of interactions that promoted their independent personal development; how they made tactical use of ‘fitting in’; and how they were socially proactive in order to develop their teacher identities. 2. Research design This article is based on two studies (Roberts, 2003, 2005) that involved a total of 32 trainees undertaking the PGCE course at the same institution, 23 from a 2000 to 2001 cohort and nine from
ARTICLE IN PRESS J. Roberts, S. Graham / Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 1401–1412
2004 to 2005. The 2000–2001 study explored professional identity development, while the 2005 study followed up its findings to explore in-school strategies that participants perceived to be of benefit to their development. 2.1. Participants The 23 participants in the 2000–2001 study belonged to one cohort of students training to become teachers of Modern Languages. Twelve were studied longitudinally, 11 cross-sectionally. The longitudinal group (nine female, three male) included 10 ‘young-matures’ aged between 25 and 35, of whom seven were career-changers. Their characteristics broadly matched those of the whole 2000–2001 cohort. The second group (nine participants) undertook the PGCE in 2005–2006. All were female, with five training to be teachers of Modern Languages and four teachers of Drama. There were fewer young-matures and career-changers than in the 2000–2001 group. Participants in both groups were aged between 22 and 40. A characteristic of both sets of interviewees is that they had all successfully completed the PGCE course. Furthermore, those quoted had at the time of interview satisfied standards related to practical teaching. They therefore can be reasonably characterised as having successfully completed their main placements. The participants constitute opportunity samples, in that they voluntarily accepted invitations made to their whole subject cohorts. Those quoted are given pseudonyms. 2.2. Data collection and analysis The 2000–2001 study consisted of an in-depth study of individual processes of teacher identity construction. Longitudinal data were elicited by means of reflective writing and semi-structured interviews (Burr & Butt, 1997; Patton, 1990). The 12 longitudinal study participants and the 11 crosssectional participants also completed end-of-year questionnaires focusing on events perceived to contribute to (or detract from) development in their professional identity. Segments of the transcribed interviews and written material relevant to research questions were selected and coded inductively. Emergent themes were represented in the form of case studies and thematic displays (Mason, 1996; Miles & Huberman, 1994).
1403
In 2005, data were elicited at the end of the course by semi-structured in-depth interviews. They elicited participants’ views on their circumstances in school and the skills and strategies they used to reach their personal goals. Transcriptions were analysed by ‘top-down’ selection of sections relevant to the research purpose, which were then content analysed to generate themes. In both the 2001 and 2005 studies, conditions of informed consent, anonymity, ethical approval and member-check were met. An outline of the interview guide used in 2005 appears in Appendix A. In order to address the specific research questions of this article, namely the extent of trainees’ capacity for self-direction, the 2001 and 2005 analyses were reviewed, issues specific to the topic of this paper were selected, and an interpretation constructed using both top-down and bottomup strategies. Both the 2001 and 2005 studies were small scale and interpretivist in nature. Hence the analyses were conducted with the aim of theoretical generalisation, to ‘‘provide circumstantial evidence for underlying processes or causal mechanisms’’ (Mason, 1996, p. 140) and to provide predictive explanations applicable to similar contexts. 3. Findings The following sections focus on participants’ accounts of social actions that enabled self-directed development. While specific details of the nature of actions and social tactics may vary, interviewees in both cohorts made reference to their need to develop their own teaching style by means of selfdirected choice and experiment, while accepting the value of staff feedback and advice. Responses to control and direction did vary, but in their different ways, participants found the means to take some control over their teaching, which will be considered under two main headings. First, trainees differentiated school cultures in terms of control or choice, and were aware of how these factors contributed to their personal development. Second, they identified a number of perceived proactive strategies they used and their consequences. To put individuals’ contributions in context, Table 1 summarises some of their distinctive characteristics. Anonymity demands limited information on participants, and none on the schools other than that they were all 11–18 comprehensive schools.
ARTICLE IN PRESS 1404
J. Roberts, S. Graham / Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 1401–1412
Table 1 Profile of trainees who are quoted Pseudonym
Cohort
Subject ML: modern languages
Place of higher education
RG: recent graduate, CC: career changer
Dieter Emma Karen Jenny Sabina Carol Anna Rachel Patrick Daisy Helen David Mary
2001 2001 2005 2005 2001 2005 2001 2005 2001 2005 2005 2001 2001
ML ML ML Drama ML Drama ML Drama ML ML ML ML ML
Europe UK UK UK UK UK Europe UK UK UK UK UK UK
RG RG CC RG CC RG CC RG CC RG CC CC CC
3.1. Perceived diversity of schools Cultures are commonly perceived by outsiders to be homogeneous whereas insiders experience them as highly diversified (Cole, 1996). Schools are no exception: they are internally diversified by competing educational and social values (Day, Whitaker & Wren, 1987; Grenfell, 1998; Hodkinson & Hodkinson, 2002; Lacey 1977). Using their experience of two school placements, and comparing experiences with fellow trainees, participants showed awareness of diversity within and between schools. Dieter (see Table 1) makes the point as follows: The obvious point about the PGCE is the incredible diversity of opportunity and constraints that people have, depending on their placements. Dieter differentiated schools in terms of room for self-directed activity and personal experiment, which he saw as linked to development as a teacher: In other contexts, some student teachers got left alone so they can experiment. Other participants differentiated schools in the same way. Emma, for example, commented: I had some teachers, mainly the younger ones, who were far more easy going about different things that I might try out, so I had a bit more freedom under them and some of them would just say, ‘‘this is what you’ve got to do, get on with it any old way you want.’’
Participants were generally highly sensitive to the balance between control and personal choice, for example: I think if you expected somebody to be there leading you through it constantly, that wasn’t what he didyhe left us to kind of feel our own way to a degree and then come to him if we had problems (Karen) and were alert to opportunities to experiment, which they saw as helping them develop their identity as a teacher: They were quite good at making you develop your own style, sort of saying, ‘‘you do things your way and we’ll just suggest to you how you can better that’’. (Jenny) (School A was) perfect, lovely, all happy to share information, happy to treat us as human beings, happy with people trying things out for themselves and doing their own thing. (Sabina) In contrast, conformity to the teaching style and choices of a mentor, the proxy teaching that is described in Edwards and Protheroe (2004), was seen as inhibiting their development: He’s kind of giving me a bit too much guidance and that’s quite hard, because someone tells you to do that and actually you’ve got your own ideas, it’s very hard to marry those two together and I had quite an unsuccessful lesson really yesterday, it was a compromise because I’d tried to marry my ideas and his ideas together y I did
ARTICLE IN PRESS J. Roberts, S. Graham / Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 1401–1412
those pretty badly. My idea the last 10/15 min was fab, do you know what I mean? (Carol) In one school Anna was expected to proxy teach, and saw this as a denial of her identity: She wanted me to talk her way, act her way, to just be her in a way. And I thought, ‘‘I’m not, I’m myself’’. This required Anna to display teach in different ways in order to satisfy different teachers: So I had basically to bend myself in one direction for one teacher and to the opposite direction for the other, just to please themyand I never felt independence of teachingyyou want to try your own thing, you want to try something different. She reported high stress levels as a result of this experience, contrasting with her second placement: Only now I realise how tight I was at the other school, how when I entered a certain classyhow my chest all of a sudden got really tightyNow I’m here, I feel much more I can do the lessons in the way I want. Of course there is still feedback but nobody says, ‘‘why didn’t you do it that way, the way I always do it?’’ A recurrent theme was that participants viewed display teaching (required in over-controlled settings) as merely deferring the teacher identity development made possible by self-directed interactions with students and staff: I can’t say I fully developed my teaching style because I still don’t yet know what I like doing and what I don’t like doing. I didn’t really have an opportunity for thatybecause it was quite controlling. (Emma) The power of such experiences to influence trainees should not be under-estimated. Of her positive placement experience Anna said: Now I feel very relaxed and I’m very happy to teach and for the first time also I get a lot of positive feedback from the pupils which is so wonderfulyall the time you think ‘‘maybe I am a teacher, maybe I should do this for a living’’. Thus, participants differentiated between contexts of self-direction and choice or of external control, and judged them accordingly as relevant or not to
1405
their own development. Positive feedback by pupils could be ascribed to their own actions rather than to the borrowed clothes of their proxy teaching identity. It also seems that trainees viewed compliance by means of proxy teaching to be a deferral of authentic development opportunities, rather than part of the process of becoming assimilated into the school community. Participants were engaged in the development of a personal model of teaching, and judged school contexts as personally helpful, obstructive or irrelevant to this development. 3.2. Perceived proactive strategies Three modes of interaction promoting self-direction were observed in the data. The first two described here, fitting in as tactical compliance and personalising advice, may present as behaviour signalling assimilation into school culture. However, our participants’ accounts suggest that they saw them as tactical moves that enabled subsequent self-direction. A third mode, taking the initiative, was generally described as a tactic used to enhance relations with staff and to maximise self-direction. 3.3. Fitting in as tactical compliance Almost all participants recognised their need to fit in during the early stages of their placement so as to win approval and acceptance. This was not seen as an end in itself, but as pre-requisite to gaining more independent development, and for this reason can be characterised as tactical compliance. Participants referred to the need for care at the beginning of placement, to ‘‘walk on eggshells’’, not as a form of imitation but a way of working out how to behave to best personal advantage. For example, Karen said she was Walking on eggshellsy. When you start any job in whatever career you do, there is a period of where you do tread around people a little bit because you don’t know people, you don’t know what questions to ask. Similarly, Rachel and then Patrick described an initial period of watchfulness: There’s the politicsyI took a week or two observing what went on. I think I was cautious to begin withyI think to begin with you’ve simply got to be diplomatic.
ARTICLE IN PRESS 1406
J. Roberts, S. Graham / Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 1401–1412
This included care to avoid confrontations that would harm future relationships: There’s a difference between being yourself completely, and being yourself but making sure you’re not aggravating other people at the same time, because that’s not conducive to any kind of positive working atmosphere at all. (Daisy) Fitting in was seen either as display, an unfortunate necessity when dealing with a very controlling mentor (a small minority of cases in our data) or as a short-term tactic that was a means to an end. In the former case, described in the preceding section, trainees anticipated chances to experiment in another placement. In the latter case, the majority of this admittedly small sample, it was seen as a means to later self-direction. The following comments illustrate this and support our interpretation of fitting in as ‘tactical compliance’: I think the only way in a school situation where you have to fit in alongside their daily work and routines, is to go for that from the inside if you like, fitting in and then getting the control rather than trying to do it the other way round. (Karen) Fit inyyou’re bottom of the pecking order. You need to cooperate to get what you want. (Helen) I took my time at the beginning, to see how things were but then I made the first moves. (Carol) 3.4. Personalising advice A related strategy was to show receptiveness to advice but to set out to personalise it rather than simply model it. Awareness of their status as a novice led many participants to value the knowledge of experienced staff. Jenny observed: It’s the beginning of a long journey: a 4/5-year curveyyou’re here and the normal teachers are up there so learn from themy.I was happy for her to say what she wanted to me. I think all the time you’ve got to bear in mind ‘‘this is somebody who has been teaching for longer than you’ve been alive’’. However, this recognition of experience was not necessarily imitative. Participants described using advice to develop their own style: And it is kind of thinking, ‘‘well, yes I’ll try it that way and next time I’ll try it perhaps slightly differently’’. (Carol)
You may as well follow their advice and then if it doesn’t work, try your own wayysort of either amend it, adjust it or kind of say ‘‘actually that doesn’t really work for me so I may try it this way’’. (Karen) They’re an ideas bank yso I tried it their way and then adjusted ityI handled it quite carefully. (Rachel) Thus, the actions of fitting in and taking advice, which could be attributed to the internalisation of school norms, can instead be seen as tactics that anticipate self-direction. 3.5. Taking the initiative After an initial phase of tactical compliance, which varied greatly in duration according to individual differences, participants reported seeking out opportunities for control and experiment according to the relationships and circumstances of their particular placement. They either did this by seizing opportunities that came up or by initiating them. Opportunities sometimes came about in a department under pressure. For example, Mary took advantage of a staffing emergency: Towards the end one of the members of staff resigned at Easter, so from Easter onwards the Head of Department was covering two timetables, so pretty much from then on I was on my own. Daisy was similarly opportunistic: It’s making yourself available, if somebody says ‘‘is anybody free to do such and such?’’ that you volunteer, or even if you see that somebody has an interesting class or they have a class that might benefit from having two people. Barbara was able to use her greater available time: I sort of introduced a whole range of games, which they responded really well to, but it’s quite hard because you always feel like you’re treading on somebody’s toes, or am I showing her up y Do you know what I mean? So it was quite difficult, but I had more time to prepare things like that, she was a sort of busy NQT and I had more time. Other participants reported making opportunities as well as taking them. In some cases they requested
ARTICLE IN PRESS J. Roberts, S. Graham / Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 1401–1412
observations, according to their personal priorities and values. Jenny reported: Initiating somethingymore for myself than anything elseythings like I went to the Progress Department, I said ‘‘I’d really like to observe some of your LSAs (learning support assistants) and of the children that you work with’’y I think in my first school that I was at, I didn’t do that enough and I regret that nowy. And Carol reported taking an initiative: I asked her, ‘‘I’d really like to observe all teachers, would you mind if I came and watched you?’’ and she was fine with me observing her, I said, ‘‘I’ve seen you talk to kids around the school, I like your style, can I come and watch and see what you do?’’ In other cases, participants volunteered to take on teaching tasks. Karen and some peers took on curriculum development work staff were too pressed to do: They’ve got a whole IT issue now so we’ve offered to do that in our further development placementsy and that way you gain an area of controly that’s through kind of looking and seeing, ‘‘where can I get it and how can I get use of that interactive whiteboardy’’ so that’s looking for an opportunity and to have built up a small niche for yourself in a department, for them to say ‘‘great, fine, go ahead’’. David concentrated on getting as much of a free hand in his teaching as possible. He volunteered to teach a whole lesson very early in his placement: I think it was all part of the fact I wanted to get straight in there and be accepted as a teacher and not to be so much a student. So I just felt like I didn’t really want to come across as being a student. As a result, he moved on to teaching whole lessons all the time: And then obviously I never did a part lesson after that in my teaching. They were all full lessons.
1407
expectations: The reason that I feel comfortable in what I’ve done and feel I’ve made the most of the experience is because of putting myself forward for thingsy I know it’s difficult because we do have a lot of university work, but if you can make the time for it, it brings you a lot of advantages. (Jenny) Engagement in school activities enabled improved relationships, and opened up further avenues of development. Relationships with students were improved: I’ve been heavily involved in some of the productions, just being there for supporty I think in terms of the actual teaching, you do have a different relationship with your studentsybecause they see you in a different light. It definitely makes a difference to classroom and behaviour management because they suddenly have this new respect for you. (Daisy) I was even involved in a dance medley thing with the other staff, I’m so glad that I did that yit was just amazing fun and it was good because the pupils saw a different side to you, they see you not just as Miss XYZ, but they also see you as a person who’s actually out to have lots of fun and doing something for the school. (Jenny) Furthermore, better relationships with staff enabled greater autonomy: I think in terms of the relationship you have with other teachers, the benefits are that people know that they can rely on you, so they would perhaps give you more responsibility or challenge you more because they would feel that you’d be able to cope, or you’d be interested in it. Also it’s them taking an interest in you, because you’ve taken an interest in them so therefore they might offer you a class, they might offer you something to do off their own bat, so it’s those kind of benefits. (Daisy) Volunteering enabled Karen to extend her knowledge and to win a degree of social power in her department:
3.6. Perceived benefits Participants saw developmental advantages in being proactive, and going beyond minimum
You gain an area of controlylooking for an opportunity and to have built up a small niche for yourself in a department.
ARTICLE IN PRESS 1408
J. Roberts, S. Graham / Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 1401–1412
4. Summary The themes reported here represent threads drawn from the mesh of trainees’ formative social experiences in schools. Themes in our data that we have not explored here, and that have been observed and reported in other studies, include:
trainees’ lack of power and their dependence on mentors (Dart & Drake, 1993; Lacey, 1977); trainees’ sensitivity to evidence of inclusion or exclusion by staff (Graham & Roberts, 2007; Hodkinson & Hodkinson, 1999; Turney et al., 1982); the cardinal role of interactions with students and staff in validating a personal teacher identity (Debolt, 1992; Dunne & Bennet, 1997; McNally et al., 1994); the importance of trainees’ social skills in school, and of early encounters in leading to positive or negative cycles of interaction (Brown et al., 1997).
Interpretation of the data on social interactions in schools, only exemplified here but drawn from two cohorts who studied in different academic years, suggests some tentative generalisations, as follows:
Perceptions of diversity: trainees are keenly aware of diversity between schools, in general and in particular in offering opportunities for selfdirected interactions with students and staff. Fitting in: as newcomers, trainees usually do their best to fit in, that is, they try not to transgress the (often unwritten) rules of the school culture. However, they view this more as a means to an end than assimilating the norms of the school. Their compliance is tactical, in that it is intended to affirm the expectations of others with the consequence of winning some autonomy within the system of the school department. In the same way, trainees follow teachers’ advice and preferred strategies selectively and critically as a means to discovering a teaching identity of their own. In general, ‘‘proxy’’ or ‘‘display’’ teaching is viewed as irrelevant to self-directed experiments designed to build a personal teaching identity. Taking initiatives: trainees actively seek space for self-direction either by seizing ‘‘agentic moments’’ opportunistically when they crop up or by initiating them. Such proactiveness opens up
further opportunities for learning by extending and diversifying interactions with staff and students in school. Thus, trainees’ interactions in school do not appear as modelling, or as the appropriation of expert members’ modes of thought and action. Instead processes of selective affiliation, differentiated development opportunities, and the use of socially navigated creative strategies combine to develop a personal model of a self-as-teacher compatible with participants’ values and biography. Central to this process, if perhaps invisible to HEI tutors and established staff, are the processes of social proactiveness that trainees in this small study saw as beneficial to their personal development. 5. Discussion 5.1. Conceptualising trainees’ agency The findings suggest that fitting in should not be viewed as a process of one-way acculturation into school norms. Fitting in constitutes a period of watchfulness, the avoidance of faux pas, an essential strategy for persons entering a new group as a potential member. However, some fitting in behaviour goes beyond this and might be more aptly termed tactical compliance: compliance designed to win a degree of autonomy within mutually recognised boundaries. Tactical compliance in this study enabled a degree of self-direction that participants saw as contributing to their individual development. This observation suggests the need to expand upon Lacey’s three-way classification of trainees’ social strategies in schools (Lacey, 1977; Lloyd, 1999; Tabachnik & Zeichner, 1988), which is restricted to compliance (with or without inner reservations) or resistance. The data presented here suggest instead that through the additional strategy of tactical compliance, trainees can develop relationships creatively with the intended consequence of meeting their self-maintenance needs, of enabling some choice and of attaining some self-directed development opportunities. The data presented here also suggest a three-way categorisation of agentic trainee behaviour. Two consist in opportunistic agentic actions (when an unexpected ‘‘agentic moment’’ crops up, such as a staff absence and the trainee steps in) and selfinitiated actions (targeting an area of control perceived as helpful to the person’s development).
ARTICLE IN PRESS J. Roberts, S. Graham / Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 1401–1412
Previous studies have interpreted volunteering as a chance to seem ‘teacherly’ (Hodkinson & Hodkinson, 1999), whereas the comments of the participants in the present study suggest that they anticipate intrinsic developmental benefits through control. The proposed third type of agentic behaviour, morphogenic development, is inherent to the constructivist model of trainees’ development. That is, trainees control their personal diet of experiences by a process of selective affiliation to the individual, group, piece of advice or behaviour that they experience in the context of perceived diversification in school culture. Selection is made according to core personal values and perceived distinctive aspects of self embedded in biography. As the data suggest, trainees have a keen sense of which interactions are helpful and those that are not. Helpful interactions are used as ‘‘validatory material’’ (Kelly, 1955) on which to develop the teacher self, whereas unhelpful interactions are set aside or used as negative counter-examples. However, helpful interactions go beyond those that simply confirm the values of the trainee (Lortie, 1975). They include receiving feedback and trying out advice from experienced staff in part both for purposes of fitting in but also, as participants made clear, as a means of learning new alternatives upon which to experiment and develop beyond the confines of their own ways of thinking. It oversimplifies the case to argue that Legitimate Peripheral Participation (Edwards & Protheroe, 2003; Wenger, 1998) promotes trainees’ conformity to an occupational norm. This view ignores trainees’ differentiation between contexts as opportunities for development and selective affiliation processes ordered by their core values and sense of self (Lacey, 1977; Pope & Keen, 1981), which are indicated in the present data. In spite of the pressures to conform found in some school departments, participants saw themselves as pursuing a personally compatible self-asteacher identity. With this expectation, they sought opportunities to make their own professional choices. They also took on advice and strategies belonging to experienced others as the raw material for experimentation ordered by core personal selfexpectations. Trainees’ self-expectations at the outset of training on occasions have been characterised as filters, even obstacles, to the training agenda (Calderhead & Robson, 1991; Furlong & Maynard, 1995; Johnston, 1994a, 1994b; Kagan, 1992; Tann, 1993; Zuzovsky, 1995). On the contrary, these
1409
are the very areas most in need of experimentation and reflection in a framework of supportive critical discussion: they are the locus of trainees’ development.
5.2. Implications: supporting self-directed development The scale of this study is such that it would not be wise to make proposals at the level of policy. In any case, the relationship between policy-making and research knowledge is far from straightforward (Ozga, 2004). However, we would argue that the study offers some insight for mentors and others into the perspectives of trainees; suggests a means to interpret their behaviour; and foregrounds the importance to trainees of self-development through experimentation. The writers would prefer to debate the meaning of the findings with mentors and other school staff, rather than simply make written proposals. However, the personal view of the writers is that the findings, limited in scale as they are, suggest certain ways of approaching interventions with trainees. At the least, they suggest that tutors should pay particular attention to any effort a trainee makes to initiate control. The means used, the aspect of teaching chosen, the perceived outcomes all indicate the trainees’ personal agenda in action under the unique circumstances of school. However small scale the trainees’ experiments may seem, or peripheral to prescribed competencies, they merit analysis and supportive attention. Carving out some control demands social skills and an awareness of the complexity of relationships within the school setting, both of which may be more or less developed in trainees at the start of their initial teacher education. University-based elements of PGCE programmes could usefully raise trainees’ awareness of the need for these social skills, perhaps by allowing trainees from a variety of schools to discuss their experiences of the external and institutional political forces at work in schools during school-based practice. These discussions could also look at examples of how tactical compliance and other interactional skills and strategies have helped previous trainees in attaining personal developmental goals. Such discussions would usefully take place at different stages of the course, taking a different focus as trainees’ developmental needs evolve. New mentors who have
ARTICLE IN PRESS 1410
J. Roberts, S. Graham / Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 1401–1412
recently been trainees could make useful contributions to these discussions. Part of the development of social skill in trainees requires an understanding by them of their role within the school setting, and of the role of their mentor and of other members of the department. While this issue can be raised as part of the university-based training, it is also important that it is discussed in the school setting, so that all parties have an explicit understanding of the ‘‘mutually recognised boundaries’’ referred to above. Tensions can develop if these boundaries remain unstated and are then over-stepped. Core self-expectations should be seen as the locus of a trainees’ development, as they order their personal agenda and interpretation of school-based interactions. There is a need for trainees to be given opportunities to explore these core self-expectations, as is underlined by Pope & Keen (1981, p. 117–118):
The student teacher as learner should become aware of his (sic) frame of reference from the outset and continue to explore his developing assumptions which will underlie his teaching behaviouryin an increasingly complex society there is a growing need for individuals yto be adaptive, personally viable and self-directive. Such self-direction or self-organization can only come about if the individual makes an effort to explore his viewpoints, purposes, means for obtaining ends and keeps these under constant review.
The agentic actions of trainees in school and their meaning provide particularly rich material for the exploration of trainees’ viewpoints and core selfexpectations. Individuals’ inner debate on the meaning of these actions should be shared and reviewed. To quote Zena again
Teaching is so personal, that you do need to know your own priorities or own beliefsywho you are I suppose, to be able to use your PGCE to the best, to make it effective.
How (if at all) you influenced the situation to your advantage? What you did that worked for you/what you would do differently? ELICIT
Situations in the main block practice that were (a) unhelpful and (b) helpful for your development as a teacher. ACTION
How can you get to the helpful situations? What did you do to get to helpful situations? What can you do/did you do to be in helpful situations rather than negative situations? RELATIONS WITH MENTOR/STAFF
What do you see as their approach? Their approach worked for you? How was the mentor compared with other mentors/staff? Prefer? Why? What can you do to get the most from your mentor? Did you have any actual or potential difficulties or tensions with the mentor? Or Were there any differences with your mentor? (ways of teaching, treating children, control over your teaching, teaching style) What did you do about it? Some trainees have a problem with what they see as very controlling staff. Can you comment? PERSONAL CONTROL
Appendix A: Interview guide (2005)
What did you see as a your area of control? Where did you have it/where not? What could you do to get some choice/control? What could you have done to get more choice and control/the choice and control you wanted.
Getting the most out of your main block practice
SUM UP
TOPIC
How you got the most out of main block practice?
Imagine a trainee who gets the most out of the main placement (compared with one who doesn’t). What sort of person are they? What do they do?
ARTICLE IN PRESS J. Roberts, S. Graham / Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 1401–1412
TOP TIPS
How do you think trainees can influence the situation best to their advantage? ADVICE
What would you tell next year’s intake to make main placement as useful as possible? Thank you!!!!
References Brown, J., Doecke, B., & Loughran, J. (1997). Understanding beginning to teach, learning about the transition from tertiary education to a professional career /http://www.swin.edu.au/ aare/97pap/LOUGJ039.htmS. Burr, V., & Butt, T. W. (1997). Interview methodology and PCP. In P. Denicolo, & M. Pope (Eds.), Sharing understanding and practice (pp. 98–105). Farnborough: EPCA Publications. Calderhead, J., & Robson, M. (1991). Images of teaching: student teachers’ early conceptions of classroom practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 7(1), 1–8. Chambers, G. N., Coles, J., & Roper, T. (2002). Why students withdraw from PGCE courses. Language Learning Journal, 25, 52–58. Cole, M. (1996). Cultural psychology, a once and future discipline. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Dart, L., & Drake, P. (1993). School-based teacher training, a conservative practice? Journal of Education for Teaching, 19(2), 175–190. Day, C., Whitaker, P., & Wren, D. (1987). Appraisal and professional development in primary schools. Milton Keynes: Open University Press. Debolt, G. P. (Ed.). (1992). Teacher induction and mentoring: School-based collaborative programs. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Department for Education (DfE) (1992). Initial teacher training (secondary phase) (Circular 9/92). London: DES. Department for Education and Employment (DfEE) (1998). Teaching, high status, high standards. Standards for the award of Newly Qualified Teachers (Circular 4/98). London: Teacher Training Agency. Department for Education and Skills (DfES) (2002). Qualifying to teach. London: DES. Dunne, E., & Bennet, N. (1997). Mentoring processes in schoolbased training. British Educational Research Journal, 23(2), 225–236. Editorial. (2001). Cambridge Journal of Education, 31(1). Edwards, A., & Protheroe, L. (2003). Learning to see in classrooms, what student teachers learn about teaching and learning while learning to teach in schools? British Educational Research Journal, 29(2), 227–242. Edwards, A., & Protheroe, L. (2004). Teaching by proxy: Understanding how mentors are positioned in partnerships. Oxford Review of Education, 30(2), 183–197. Furlong, J., & Maynard, T. (1995). Mentoring student teachers: The growth of professional knowledge. London: Routledge.
1411
Graham, S. J., & Roberts, J. (2007). Student–teachers’ perspectives on positive and negative social processes in school. Teachers and Teaching, 13(4), 399–410. Gratch, A. (2001). The culture of teaching and beginning teaching development. Teacher Education Quarterly, 10, 121–136 Available (retrieved November 30, 2007) from /http://teqjournal.org/backvols/2001/28_4/v28n4_09.pdfS. Grenfell, M. (1998). Training teachers in practice. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Ltd. Grey, C. (1994). Career as a project of the self and labour process discipline. Sociology, 28(2), 479–497. Hargreaves, A. (1995). Realities of teaching. In L. W. Anderson (Ed.), International encyclopedia of teaching and teacher education (2nd ed., pp. 80–87). Cambridge, UK: Pergamon. Hodges, D. C. (1998). Participation as dis-identification with/in a community of practice. Mind, Culture and Activity, 5(4), 272–290. Hodkinson, H., & Hodkinson, P. (1999). Teaching to learn, learning to teach? School based non teaching activity in an initial teacher education and training partnership scheme. Teaching and Teacher Education, 15, 273–285. Hodkinson, H., & Hodkinson, P. (2002). Learning in a workplace community, secondary school teachers in their subject departments. In Paper presented at BERA annual conference 2002. Available from (retrieved November 30, 2007) /http:// www.tlrp.org/project%20sites/IILW/pr5%20E-BERA%2002% 20biogs.htmS. Johnston, S. (1994a). Experience is the best teacher: Or is it? An analysis of the role of experience in learning to teach. Journal of Teacher Education, 45(1), 199–208. Johnston, S. (1994b). Conversations with student teachers— Enhancing the dialogue of learning to teach. Teaching and Teacher Education, 10(1), 71–82. Jones, M. (2005). Fitting in, feeling excluded or opting out? An investigation into the socialisation process of newcomers to the teaching profession in secondary schools in England. Journal of In-service Education, 31, 509–526. Kagan, D. (1992). Professional growth among preservice and beginning teachers. Review of Educational Research, 62(2), 129–169. Kelly, G. A. (1955). The psychology of personal constructs, clinical diagnosis and psychotherapy, Vols. 1 and 2. New York: W.W. Norton & Co. Lacey, C. (1977). The socialization of teachers. London: Methuen. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Lloyd, M. (1999). ‘A long weekend’, a case study of student teachers’ experiences of a secondary PGCE course. Ph.D. thesis, University of Southampton. Lortie, D. (1975). Schoolteacher, a sociological study. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Mason, J. (1996). Qualitative researching. London: Sage. Maynard, T. (2001). The student teacher and the school community of practice, a consideration of learning as participation. Cambridge Journal of Education, 31(1), 39–52. McNally, J., Cope, P., Inglis, W., & Stronach, I. (1994). Current realities in the student teaching experience: A preliminary enquiry. Teaching and Teacher Education, 10(2), 219–230. Miles, A. M., & Huberman, M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis, an expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
ARTICLE IN PRESS 1412
J. Roberts, S. Graham / Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 1401–1412
Olson, M., & Osbourne, J. (1991). Learning to teach, the first year. Teaching and Teacher Education, 7, 331–343. Ozga, J. (2004). From research to policy and practice: Some issues in knowledge transfer. Centre for Education Sociology Briefing no. 31: University of Edinburgh. Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park: Sage. Pope, M. L., & Keen, T. R. (1981). Personal construct psychology and education. London: Academic Press. Roberts, J. (2003). Personal and professional identity re-construction of young mature trainees in the context of a PGCE course. Ph.D. thesis, University of Reading. Roberts, J. (2005). Role perceptions of trainees on main block practice, some themes. Unpublished training material, Institute of Education, University of Reading. Tabachnik, B. R., & Zeichner, K. (1988). The impact of student teaching experience on the development of teacher perspectives. Journal of Teacher Education, 35(6), 28–36. Tann, S. (1993). Eliciting student teachers’ personal theories. In J. Calderhead (Ed.), Conceptualizing reflection in teacher development. London: Falmer. Turney, C., Cairns, L. G., Eltis, K. J., Hatton, N., Thew, D. M., Towler, J., et al. (1982). The practicum in teacher
education: Research, practice and supervision. Adelaide: Sydney University Press. Vulliamy, G., & Yeh, Y.-C. (1998). The development of mentoring schemes for probationer and student teachers in Taiwan and England. Journal of In-Service Education, 24(2), 293–305. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Wu, J. (1998). School work environment and its impact on the professional competence of newly qualified teachers. Journal of In-service Education, 24, 213–225. Zeichner, K. M., & Gore, J. H. (1990). Teacher socialisation. In W. R. Houston, M. Huberman, & J. Sikula (Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher education (pp. 329–348). New York: Macmillan. Zeichner, K. M., Tabachnik, B. R., & Densmore, K. (1987). Individual, institutional and cultural influences on the development of teachers’ craft knowledge. In J. Calderhead (Ed.), Exploring teachers’ thinking (pp. 21–59). London: Cassell. Zuzovsky, R. (1995). Professional development of student teachers during preservice training. In R. Hoz, & M. Silberstein (Eds.), Partnerships of schools and institutions of higher education. Tel Aviv: Ben Gurion Press.
Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 1401–1412 www.elsevier.com/locate/tate
Agency and conformity in school-based teacher training Jon Roberts, Suzanne Graham Institute of Education, University of Reading, Bulmershe Court, Earley, Reading RG6 1HY, UK Received 23 July 2007; received in revised form 1 December 2007; accepted 14 January 2008
Abstract Concern has been expressed that the current climate in schools militates against trainee teachers’ self-directed development. This article explores the issue of trainees’ capacity for self-direction through the analysis of interviews with 32 trainees, investigating their perceived proactive social strategies. Three proactive strategies were identified: ‘tactical compliance’, personalising advice, and seeking out opportunities to exercise control. It is argued that these strategies are indicative of trainees’ drive to establish a personal teaching identity through self-directed development and the creation of individual development agendas. The article concludes by emphasising the importance of the development of proactive social skills in beginning teachers. r 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Keywords: Agency; School culture; Teacher trainee; Teacher socialisation; Self-directed development
My mentor would give me things and I could pick and try out what works for me yteaching is so personal that you do need to know your own priorities or own beliefs, who you are I suppose, to be able to use your [course] to the best, to make it effective. (Zena)
1. Introduction The principal form of pre-service teacher education in England and Wales is the Post-Graduate Certificate of Education (PGCE). This is a 36-week course, during which trainee teachers’ time is divided between input from the Higher Education Institute (HEI) to which they are attached and school-based practical teaching. The school-based Corresponding author. Tel.: +44 1189 265 642.
E-mail address: [email protected] (J. Roberts).
element of the course includes, typically, a ‘serial’ placement, where trainees spend part of the week in the HEI and part of the week in school, and a ‘main block’ placement, where they are in school 5 days a week for several weeks and teaching relatively independently. In addition, the school-based element has to amount to at least 120 days and to be spent in at least two different schools in order for trainees to have a broad experience (DfE, 1992). These requirements are specified by central government and overseen by non-governmental agencies, the Training and Development Agency (TDA) and Office for Standards in Education (OFSTED). Schools themselves are subject to the imperatives of successful curriculum delivery (Edwards & Protheroe, 2004) and rigorous inspection enforces standards of teaching competence (DfEE, 1998, 2002). It therefore seems likely that trainees’ experiences are also going to be subject to forces of conformity and centralisation. Indeed, concerns
0742-051X/$ - see front matter r 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2008.01.003
ARTICLE IN PRESS 1402
J. Roberts, S. Graham / Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 1401–1412
have been voiced that contemporary conditions of professional socialisation inhibit trainees’ self-directed development. For example, Edwards and Protheroe (2003) argue that the demand for results pushes mentors to impose ‘‘proxy teaching’’ on trainees. It is even suggested that trainees’ efforts to become self-directing may be penalised: Does a student who chooses the path of selfrealisation risk losing the support of those in a position to enforce cultural obedience? (Editorial, 2001, p.7) In the light of these concerns, the purpose of this article is to explore ways, if any, in which a small sample of trainees saw themselves as having influenced their own development by being socially proactive in their relations with school staff. 1.1. Perspectives on professional socialisation Teacher socialisation research has tended to emphasize structural, external influences on individuals as they become a member of the teaching community. Research does indicate that the institutional environment has a profound impact on teachers’ professional development (Hodkinson & Hodkinson, 2002; Vulliamy & Yeh, 1998; Wu, 1998), and that teaching tasks, student behaviour, school culture and occupational culture operate powerfully to affect teachers’ thinking and practice (Zeichner, Tabachnik & Densmore, 1987). Many studies have indicated that trainees develop their professional identity through their relationships with staff (Brown, Doecke, & Loughran 1997; Hargreaves, 1995), and that trainees, as powerless newcomers, have an overriding need for security and inclusion in the school community (McNally, Cope, Inglis & Stronach, 1994; Zeichner & Gore, 1990). They do this by fitting in (Jones, 2005; Olson & Osbourne, 1991) and avoiding confrontations with powerful staff, of whom the mentor is seen as most crucial to their survival (Chambers, Coles & Roper, 2002; Dart & Drake 1993). Some researchers (Edwards & Protheroe, 2003; Maynard, 2001) view external influences on trainees from the perspective of situated learning theory (Lave & Wenger, 1991; Wenger, 1998). This is a view in which: Learners appropriate the meanings and actions used by more expert members of the practice community through a process of peripheral
participation and eventually become fully fledged members. (Edwards & Protheroe, 2003, p. 228) However, Hodkinson and Hodkinson (2002) question the relevance to schools of this perspective, in that it is a theory of apprenticeship in occupationally homogeneous contexts. They argue that this context contrasts with the circumstances of trainees, whose interactions take place in departments that are non-monolithic in nature: departments and schools are open systems in which individuals are influenced by external ideas and pressures. Furthermore, as Hodkinson & Hodkinson suggest, interpersonal processes in schools are multi-directional rather than simply from centre to periphery, from the senior teacher to the novice. Such diversity enables a degree of personally directed development. Similarly, Hodges’ (1998) study of trainees’ dis-identification arising from negative experiences challenged the assumption that participation will proceed from peripheral to central participation. In another context, novice accountants, Grey’s (1994) study also suggested that there can be space for trainees to develop within social structures. Lacey (1977) categorised trainees’ social strategies in schools as promoting conformity (internalised adjustment), passive self-maintenance (strategic compliance), and influencing others to change their interpretations of events (strategic redefinition). He recognised the potential of strategic redefinition to contribute to structural change, but did not explore its personal developmental consequences. Exploration of trainees’ self-directing strategies since then has been scant. In one of the few studies of trainees’ proactive actions, Gratch (2001, p. 6) suggested that in order for trainee teachers to benefit from ‘‘opportunities for agency within the structure of schools’’ the former needed to ‘‘develop skills in order to take advantage of these agentic moments’’. Whether trainees are able to develop such skills is the subject of this article. It considers the participants’ accounts of interactions that promoted their independent personal development; how they made tactical use of ‘fitting in’; and how they were socially proactive in order to develop their teacher identities. 2. Research design This article is based on two studies (Roberts, 2003, 2005) that involved a total of 32 trainees undertaking the PGCE course at the same institution, 23 from a 2000 to 2001 cohort and nine from
ARTICLE IN PRESS J. Roberts, S. Graham / Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 1401–1412
2004 to 2005. The 2000–2001 study explored professional identity development, while the 2005 study followed up its findings to explore in-school strategies that participants perceived to be of benefit to their development. 2.1. Participants The 23 participants in the 2000–2001 study belonged to one cohort of students training to become teachers of Modern Languages. Twelve were studied longitudinally, 11 cross-sectionally. The longitudinal group (nine female, three male) included 10 ‘young-matures’ aged between 25 and 35, of whom seven were career-changers. Their characteristics broadly matched those of the whole 2000–2001 cohort. The second group (nine participants) undertook the PGCE in 2005–2006. All were female, with five training to be teachers of Modern Languages and four teachers of Drama. There were fewer young-matures and career-changers than in the 2000–2001 group. Participants in both groups were aged between 22 and 40. A characteristic of both sets of interviewees is that they had all successfully completed the PGCE course. Furthermore, those quoted had at the time of interview satisfied standards related to practical teaching. They therefore can be reasonably characterised as having successfully completed their main placements. The participants constitute opportunity samples, in that they voluntarily accepted invitations made to their whole subject cohorts. Those quoted are given pseudonyms. 2.2. Data collection and analysis The 2000–2001 study consisted of an in-depth study of individual processes of teacher identity construction. Longitudinal data were elicited by means of reflective writing and semi-structured interviews (Burr & Butt, 1997; Patton, 1990). The 12 longitudinal study participants and the 11 crosssectional participants also completed end-of-year questionnaires focusing on events perceived to contribute to (or detract from) development in their professional identity. Segments of the transcribed interviews and written material relevant to research questions were selected and coded inductively. Emergent themes were represented in the form of case studies and thematic displays (Mason, 1996; Miles & Huberman, 1994).
1403
In 2005, data were elicited at the end of the course by semi-structured in-depth interviews. They elicited participants’ views on their circumstances in school and the skills and strategies they used to reach their personal goals. Transcriptions were analysed by ‘top-down’ selection of sections relevant to the research purpose, which were then content analysed to generate themes. In both the 2001 and 2005 studies, conditions of informed consent, anonymity, ethical approval and member-check were met. An outline of the interview guide used in 2005 appears in Appendix A. In order to address the specific research questions of this article, namely the extent of trainees’ capacity for self-direction, the 2001 and 2005 analyses were reviewed, issues specific to the topic of this paper were selected, and an interpretation constructed using both top-down and bottomup strategies. Both the 2001 and 2005 studies were small scale and interpretivist in nature. Hence the analyses were conducted with the aim of theoretical generalisation, to ‘‘provide circumstantial evidence for underlying processes or causal mechanisms’’ (Mason, 1996, p. 140) and to provide predictive explanations applicable to similar contexts. 3. Findings The following sections focus on participants’ accounts of social actions that enabled self-directed development. While specific details of the nature of actions and social tactics may vary, interviewees in both cohorts made reference to their need to develop their own teaching style by means of selfdirected choice and experiment, while accepting the value of staff feedback and advice. Responses to control and direction did vary, but in their different ways, participants found the means to take some control over their teaching, which will be considered under two main headings. First, trainees differentiated school cultures in terms of control or choice, and were aware of how these factors contributed to their personal development. Second, they identified a number of perceived proactive strategies they used and their consequences. To put individuals’ contributions in context, Table 1 summarises some of their distinctive characteristics. Anonymity demands limited information on participants, and none on the schools other than that they were all 11–18 comprehensive schools.
ARTICLE IN PRESS 1404
J. Roberts, S. Graham / Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 1401–1412
Table 1 Profile of trainees who are quoted Pseudonym
Cohort
Subject ML: modern languages
Place of higher education
RG: recent graduate, CC: career changer
Dieter Emma Karen Jenny Sabina Carol Anna Rachel Patrick Daisy Helen David Mary
2001 2001 2005 2005 2001 2005 2001 2005 2001 2005 2005 2001 2001
ML ML ML Drama ML Drama ML Drama ML ML ML ML ML
Europe UK UK UK UK UK Europe UK UK UK UK UK UK
RG RG CC RG CC RG CC RG CC RG CC CC CC
3.1. Perceived diversity of schools Cultures are commonly perceived by outsiders to be homogeneous whereas insiders experience them as highly diversified (Cole, 1996). Schools are no exception: they are internally diversified by competing educational and social values (Day, Whitaker & Wren, 1987; Grenfell, 1998; Hodkinson & Hodkinson, 2002; Lacey 1977). Using their experience of two school placements, and comparing experiences with fellow trainees, participants showed awareness of diversity within and between schools. Dieter (see Table 1) makes the point as follows: The obvious point about the PGCE is the incredible diversity of opportunity and constraints that people have, depending on their placements. Dieter differentiated schools in terms of room for self-directed activity and personal experiment, which he saw as linked to development as a teacher: In other contexts, some student teachers got left alone so they can experiment. Other participants differentiated schools in the same way. Emma, for example, commented: I had some teachers, mainly the younger ones, who were far more easy going about different things that I might try out, so I had a bit more freedom under them and some of them would just say, ‘‘this is what you’ve got to do, get on with it any old way you want.’’
Participants were generally highly sensitive to the balance between control and personal choice, for example: I think if you expected somebody to be there leading you through it constantly, that wasn’t what he didyhe left us to kind of feel our own way to a degree and then come to him if we had problems (Karen) and were alert to opportunities to experiment, which they saw as helping them develop their identity as a teacher: They were quite good at making you develop your own style, sort of saying, ‘‘you do things your way and we’ll just suggest to you how you can better that’’. (Jenny) (School A was) perfect, lovely, all happy to share information, happy to treat us as human beings, happy with people trying things out for themselves and doing their own thing. (Sabina) In contrast, conformity to the teaching style and choices of a mentor, the proxy teaching that is described in Edwards and Protheroe (2004), was seen as inhibiting their development: He’s kind of giving me a bit too much guidance and that’s quite hard, because someone tells you to do that and actually you’ve got your own ideas, it’s very hard to marry those two together and I had quite an unsuccessful lesson really yesterday, it was a compromise because I’d tried to marry my ideas and his ideas together y I did
ARTICLE IN PRESS J. Roberts, S. Graham / Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 1401–1412
those pretty badly. My idea the last 10/15 min was fab, do you know what I mean? (Carol) In one school Anna was expected to proxy teach, and saw this as a denial of her identity: She wanted me to talk her way, act her way, to just be her in a way. And I thought, ‘‘I’m not, I’m myself’’. This required Anna to display teach in different ways in order to satisfy different teachers: So I had basically to bend myself in one direction for one teacher and to the opposite direction for the other, just to please themyand I never felt independence of teachingyyou want to try your own thing, you want to try something different. She reported high stress levels as a result of this experience, contrasting with her second placement: Only now I realise how tight I was at the other school, how when I entered a certain classyhow my chest all of a sudden got really tightyNow I’m here, I feel much more I can do the lessons in the way I want. Of course there is still feedback but nobody says, ‘‘why didn’t you do it that way, the way I always do it?’’ A recurrent theme was that participants viewed display teaching (required in over-controlled settings) as merely deferring the teacher identity development made possible by self-directed interactions with students and staff: I can’t say I fully developed my teaching style because I still don’t yet know what I like doing and what I don’t like doing. I didn’t really have an opportunity for thatybecause it was quite controlling. (Emma) The power of such experiences to influence trainees should not be under-estimated. Of her positive placement experience Anna said: Now I feel very relaxed and I’m very happy to teach and for the first time also I get a lot of positive feedback from the pupils which is so wonderfulyall the time you think ‘‘maybe I am a teacher, maybe I should do this for a living’’. Thus, participants differentiated between contexts of self-direction and choice or of external control, and judged them accordingly as relevant or not to
1405
their own development. Positive feedback by pupils could be ascribed to their own actions rather than to the borrowed clothes of their proxy teaching identity. It also seems that trainees viewed compliance by means of proxy teaching to be a deferral of authentic development opportunities, rather than part of the process of becoming assimilated into the school community. Participants were engaged in the development of a personal model of teaching, and judged school contexts as personally helpful, obstructive or irrelevant to this development. 3.2. Perceived proactive strategies Three modes of interaction promoting self-direction were observed in the data. The first two described here, fitting in as tactical compliance and personalising advice, may present as behaviour signalling assimilation into school culture. However, our participants’ accounts suggest that they saw them as tactical moves that enabled subsequent self-direction. A third mode, taking the initiative, was generally described as a tactic used to enhance relations with staff and to maximise self-direction. 3.3. Fitting in as tactical compliance Almost all participants recognised their need to fit in during the early stages of their placement so as to win approval and acceptance. This was not seen as an end in itself, but as pre-requisite to gaining more independent development, and for this reason can be characterised as tactical compliance. Participants referred to the need for care at the beginning of placement, to ‘‘walk on eggshells’’, not as a form of imitation but a way of working out how to behave to best personal advantage. For example, Karen said she was Walking on eggshellsy. When you start any job in whatever career you do, there is a period of where you do tread around people a little bit because you don’t know people, you don’t know what questions to ask. Similarly, Rachel and then Patrick described an initial period of watchfulness: There’s the politicsyI took a week or two observing what went on. I think I was cautious to begin withyI think to begin with you’ve simply got to be diplomatic.
ARTICLE IN PRESS 1406
J. Roberts, S. Graham / Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 1401–1412
This included care to avoid confrontations that would harm future relationships: There’s a difference between being yourself completely, and being yourself but making sure you’re not aggravating other people at the same time, because that’s not conducive to any kind of positive working atmosphere at all. (Daisy) Fitting in was seen either as display, an unfortunate necessity when dealing with a very controlling mentor (a small minority of cases in our data) or as a short-term tactic that was a means to an end. In the former case, described in the preceding section, trainees anticipated chances to experiment in another placement. In the latter case, the majority of this admittedly small sample, it was seen as a means to later self-direction. The following comments illustrate this and support our interpretation of fitting in as ‘tactical compliance’: I think the only way in a school situation where you have to fit in alongside their daily work and routines, is to go for that from the inside if you like, fitting in and then getting the control rather than trying to do it the other way round. (Karen) Fit inyyou’re bottom of the pecking order. You need to cooperate to get what you want. (Helen) I took my time at the beginning, to see how things were but then I made the first moves. (Carol) 3.4. Personalising advice A related strategy was to show receptiveness to advice but to set out to personalise it rather than simply model it. Awareness of their status as a novice led many participants to value the knowledge of experienced staff. Jenny observed: It’s the beginning of a long journey: a 4/5-year curveyyou’re here and the normal teachers are up there so learn from themy.I was happy for her to say what she wanted to me. I think all the time you’ve got to bear in mind ‘‘this is somebody who has been teaching for longer than you’ve been alive’’. However, this recognition of experience was not necessarily imitative. Participants described using advice to develop their own style: And it is kind of thinking, ‘‘well, yes I’ll try it that way and next time I’ll try it perhaps slightly differently’’. (Carol)
You may as well follow their advice and then if it doesn’t work, try your own wayysort of either amend it, adjust it or kind of say ‘‘actually that doesn’t really work for me so I may try it this way’’. (Karen) They’re an ideas bank yso I tried it their way and then adjusted ityI handled it quite carefully. (Rachel) Thus, the actions of fitting in and taking advice, which could be attributed to the internalisation of school norms, can instead be seen as tactics that anticipate self-direction. 3.5. Taking the initiative After an initial phase of tactical compliance, which varied greatly in duration according to individual differences, participants reported seeking out opportunities for control and experiment according to the relationships and circumstances of their particular placement. They either did this by seizing opportunities that came up or by initiating them. Opportunities sometimes came about in a department under pressure. For example, Mary took advantage of a staffing emergency: Towards the end one of the members of staff resigned at Easter, so from Easter onwards the Head of Department was covering two timetables, so pretty much from then on I was on my own. Daisy was similarly opportunistic: It’s making yourself available, if somebody says ‘‘is anybody free to do such and such?’’ that you volunteer, or even if you see that somebody has an interesting class or they have a class that might benefit from having two people. Barbara was able to use her greater available time: I sort of introduced a whole range of games, which they responded really well to, but it’s quite hard because you always feel like you’re treading on somebody’s toes, or am I showing her up y Do you know what I mean? So it was quite difficult, but I had more time to prepare things like that, she was a sort of busy NQT and I had more time. Other participants reported making opportunities as well as taking them. In some cases they requested
ARTICLE IN PRESS J. Roberts, S. Graham / Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 1401–1412
observations, according to their personal priorities and values. Jenny reported: Initiating somethingymore for myself than anything elseythings like I went to the Progress Department, I said ‘‘I’d really like to observe some of your LSAs (learning support assistants) and of the children that you work with’’y I think in my first school that I was at, I didn’t do that enough and I regret that nowy. And Carol reported taking an initiative: I asked her, ‘‘I’d really like to observe all teachers, would you mind if I came and watched you?’’ and she was fine with me observing her, I said, ‘‘I’ve seen you talk to kids around the school, I like your style, can I come and watch and see what you do?’’ In other cases, participants volunteered to take on teaching tasks. Karen and some peers took on curriculum development work staff were too pressed to do: They’ve got a whole IT issue now so we’ve offered to do that in our further development placementsy and that way you gain an area of controly that’s through kind of looking and seeing, ‘‘where can I get it and how can I get use of that interactive whiteboardy’’ so that’s looking for an opportunity and to have built up a small niche for yourself in a department, for them to say ‘‘great, fine, go ahead’’. David concentrated on getting as much of a free hand in his teaching as possible. He volunteered to teach a whole lesson very early in his placement: I think it was all part of the fact I wanted to get straight in there and be accepted as a teacher and not to be so much a student. So I just felt like I didn’t really want to come across as being a student. As a result, he moved on to teaching whole lessons all the time: And then obviously I never did a part lesson after that in my teaching. They were all full lessons.
1407
expectations: The reason that I feel comfortable in what I’ve done and feel I’ve made the most of the experience is because of putting myself forward for thingsy I know it’s difficult because we do have a lot of university work, but if you can make the time for it, it brings you a lot of advantages. (Jenny) Engagement in school activities enabled improved relationships, and opened up further avenues of development. Relationships with students were improved: I’ve been heavily involved in some of the productions, just being there for supporty I think in terms of the actual teaching, you do have a different relationship with your studentsybecause they see you in a different light. It definitely makes a difference to classroom and behaviour management because they suddenly have this new respect for you. (Daisy) I was even involved in a dance medley thing with the other staff, I’m so glad that I did that yit was just amazing fun and it was good because the pupils saw a different side to you, they see you not just as Miss XYZ, but they also see you as a person who’s actually out to have lots of fun and doing something for the school. (Jenny) Furthermore, better relationships with staff enabled greater autonomy: I think in terms of the relationship you have with other teachers, the benefits are that people know that they can rely on you, so they would perhaps give you more responsibility or challenge you more because they would feel that you’d be able to cope, or you’d be interested in it. Also it’s them taking an interest in you, because you’ve taken an interest in them so therefore they might offer you a class, they might offer you something to do off their own bat, so it’s those kind of benefits. (Daisy) Volunteering enabled Karen to extend her knowledge and to win a degree of social power in her department:
3.6. Perceived benefits Participants saw developmental advantages in being proactive, and going beyond minimum
You gain an area of controlylooking for an opportunity and to have built up a small niche for yourself in a department.
ARTICLE IN PRESS 1408
J. Roberts, S. Graham / Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 1401–1412
4. Summary The themes reported here represent threads drawn from the mesh of trainees’ formative social experiences in schools. Themes in our data that we have not explored here, and that have been observed and reported in other studies, include:
trainees’ lack of power and their dependence on mentors (Dart & Drake, 1993; Lacey, 1977); trainees’ sensitivity to evidence of inclusion or exclusion by staff (Graham & Roberts, 2007; Hodkinson & Hodkinson, 1999; Turney et al., 1982); the cardinal role of interactions with students and staff in validating a personal teacher identity (Debolt, 1992; Dunne & Bennet, 1997; McNally et al., 1994); the importance of trainees’ social skills in school, and of early encounters in leading to positive or negative cycles of interaction (Brown et al., 1997).
Interpretation of the data on social interactions in schools, only exemplified here but drawn from two cohorts who studied in different academic years, suggests some tentative generalisations, as follows:
Perceptions of diversity: trainees are keenly aware of diversity between schools, in general and in particular in offering opportunities for selfdirected interactions with students and staff. Fitting in: as newcomers, trainees usually do their best to fit in, that is, they try not to transgress the (often unwritten) rules of the school culture. However, they view this more as a means to an end than assimilating the norms of the school. Their compliance is tactical, in that it is intended to affirm the expectations of others with the consequence of winning some autonomy within the system of the school department. In the same way, trainees follow teachers’ advice and preferred strategies selectively and critically as a means to discovering a teaching identity of their own. In general, ‘‘proxy’’ or ‘‘display’’ teaching is viewed as irrelevant to self-directed experiments designed to build a personal teaching identity. Taking initiatives: trainees actively seek space for self-direction either by seizing ‘‘agentic moments’’ opportunistically when they crop up or by initiating them. Such proactiveness opens up
further opportunities for learning by extending and diversifying interactions with staff and students in school. Thus, trainees’ interactions in school do not appear as modelling, or as the appropriation of expert members’ modes of thought and action. Instead processes of selective affiliation, differentiated development opportunities, and the use of socially navigated creative strategies combine to develop a personal model of a self-as-teacher compatible with participants’ values and biography. Central to this process, if perhaps invisible to HEI tutors and established staff, are the processes of social proactiveness that trainees in this small study saw as beneficial to their personal development. 5. Discussion 5.1. Conceptualising trainees’ agency The findings suggest that fitting in should not be viewed as a process of one-way acculturation into school norms. Fitting in constitutes a period of watchfulness, the avoidance of faux pas, an essential strategy for persons entering a new group as a potential member. However, some fitting in behaviour goes beyond this and might be more aptly termed tactical compliance: compliance designed to win a degree of autonomy within mutually recognised boundaries. Tactical compliance in this study enabled a degree of self-direction that participants saw as contributing to their individual development. This observation suggests the need to expand upon Lacey’s three-way classification of trainees’ social strategies in schools (Lacey, 1977; Lloyd, 1999; Tabachnik & Zeichner, 1988), which is restricted to compliance (with or without inner reservations) or resistance. The data presented here suggest instead that through the additional strategy of tactical compliance, trainees can develop relationships creatively with the intended consequence of meeting their self-maintenance needs, of enabling some choice and of attaining some self-directed development opportunities. The data presented here also suggest a three-way categorisation of agentic trainee behaviour. Two consist in opportunistic agentic actions (when an unexpected ‘‘agentic moment’’ crops up, such as a staff absence and the trainee steps in) and selfinitiated actions (targeting an area of control perceived as helpful to the person’s development).
ARTICLE IN PRESS J. Roberts, S. Graham / Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 1401–1412
Previous studies have interpreted volunteering as a chance to seem ‘teacherly’ (Hodkinson & Hodkinson, 1999), whereas the comments of the participants in the present study suggest that they anticipate intrinsic developmental benefits through control. The proposed third type of agentic behaviour, morphogenic development, is inherent to the constructivist model of trainees’ development. That is, trainees control their personal diet of experiences by a process of selective affiliation to the individual, group, piece of advice or behaviour that they experience in the context of perceived diversification in school culture. Selection is made according to core personal values and perceived distinctive aspects of self embedded in biography. As the data suggest, trainees have a keen sense of which interactions are helpful and those that are not. Helpful interactions are used as ‘‘validatory material’’ (Kelly, 1955) on which to develop the teacher self, whereas unhelpful interactions are set aside or used as negative counter-examples. However, helpful interactions go beyond those that simply confirm the values of the trainee (Lortie, 1975). They include receiving feedback and trying out advice from experienced staff in part both for purposes of fitting in but also, as participants made clear, as a means of learning new alternatives upon which to experiment and develop beyond the confines of their own ways of thinking. It oversimplifies the case to argue that Legitimate Peripheral Participation (Edwards & Protheroe, 2003; Wenger, 1998) promotes trainees’ conformity to an occupational norm. This view ignores trainees’ differentiation between contexts as opportunities for development and selective affiliation processes ordered by their core values and sense of self (Lacey, 1977; Pope & Keen, 1981), which are indicated in the present data. In spite of the pressures to conform found in some school departments, participants saw themselves as pursuing a personally compatible self-asteacher identity. With this expectation, they sought opportunities to make their own professional choices. They also took on advice and strategies belonging to experienced others as the raw material for experimentation ordered by core personal selfexpectations. Trainees’ self-expectations at the outset of training on occasions have been characterised as filters, even obstacles, to the training agenda (Calderhead & Robson, 1991; Furlong & Maynard, 1995; Johnston, 1994a, 1994b; Kagan, 1992; Tann, 1993; Zuzovsky, 1995). On the contrary, these
1409
are the very areas most in need of experimentation and reflection in a framework of supportive critical discussion: they are the locus of trainees’ development.
5.2. Implications: supporting self-directed development The scale of this study is such that it would not be wise to make proposals at the level of policy. In any case, the relationship between policy-making and research knowledge is far from straightforward (Ozga, 2004). However, we would argue that the study offers some insight for mentors and others into the perspectives of trainees; suggests a means to interpret their behaviour; and foregrounds the importance to trainees of self-development through experimentation. The writers would prefer to debate the meaning of the findings with mentors and other school staff, rather than simply make written proposals. However, the personal view of the writers is that the findings, limited in scale as they are, suggest certain ways of approaching interventions with trainees. At the least, they suggest that tutors should pay particular attention to any effort a trainee makes to initiate control. The means used, the aspect of teaching chosen, the perceived outcomes all indicate the trainees’ personal agenda in action under the unique circumstances of school. However small scale the trainees’ experiments may seem, or peripheral to prescribed competencies, they merit analysis and supportive attention. Carving out some control demands social skills and an awareness of the complexity of relationships within the school setting, both of which may be more or less developed in trainees at the start of their initial teacher education. University-based elements of PGCE programmes could usefully raise trainees’ awareness of the need for these social skills, perhaps by allowing trainees from a variety of schools to discuss their experiences of the external and institutional political forces at work in schools during school-based practice. These discussions could also look at examples of how tactical compliance and other interactional skills and strategies have helped previous trainees in attaining personal developmental goals. Such discussions would usefully take place at different stages of the course, taking a different focus as trainees’ developmental needs evolve. New mentors who have
ARTICLE IN PRESS 1410
J. Roberts, S. Graham / Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 1401–1412
recently been trainees could make useful contributions to these discussions. Part of the development of social skill in trainees requires an understanding by them of their role within the school setting, and of the role of their mentor and of other members of the department. While this issue can be raised as part of the university-based training, it is also important that it is discussed in the school setting, so that all parties have an explicit understanding of the ‘‘mutually recognised boundaries’’ referred to above. Tensions can develop if these boundaries remain unstated and are then over-stepped. Core self-expectations should be seen as the locus of a trainees’ development, as they order their personal agenda and interpretation of school-based interactions. There is a need for trainees to be given opportunities to explore these core self-expectations, as is underlined by Pope & Keen (1981, p. 117–118):
The student teacher as learner should become aware of his (sic) frame of reference from the outset and continue to explore his developing assumptions which will underlie his teaching behaviouryin an increasingly complex society there is a growing need for individuals yto be adaptive, personally viable and self-directive. Such self-direction or self-organization can only come about if the individual makes an effort to explore his viewpoints, purposes, means for obtaining ends and keeps these under constant review.
The agentic actions of trainees in school and their meaning provide particularly rich material for the exploration of trainees’ viewpoints and core selfexpectations. Individuals’ inner debate on the meaning of these actions should be shared and reviewed. To quote Zena again
Teaching is so personal, that you do need to know your own priorities or own beliefsywho you are I suppose, to be able to use your PGCE to the best, to make it effective.
How (if at all) you influenced the situation to your advantage? What you did that worked for you/what you would do differently? ELICIT
Situations in the main block practice that were (a) unhelpful and (b) helpful for your development as a teacher. ACTION
How can you get to the helpful situations? What did you do to get to helpful situations? What can you do/did you do to be in helpful situations rather than negative situations? RELATIONS WITH MENTOR/STAFF
What do you see as their approach? Their approach worked for you? How was the mentor compared with other mentors/staff? Prefer? Why? What can you do to get the most from your mentor? Did you have any actual or potential difficulties or tensions with the mentor? Or Were there any differences with your mentor? (ways of teaching, treating children, control over your teaching, teaching style) What did you do about it? Some trainees have a problem with what they see as very controlling staff. Can you comment? PERSONAL CONTROL
Appendix A: Interview guide (2005)
What did you see as a your area of control? Where did you have it/where not? What could you do to get some choice/control? What could you have done to get more choice and control/the choice and control you wanted.
Getting the most out of your main block practice
SUM UP
TOPIC
How you got the most out of main block practice?
Imagine a trainee who gets the most out of the main placement (compared with one who doesn’t). What sort of person are they? What do they do?
ARTICLE IN PRESS J. Roberts, S. Graham / Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 1401–1412
TOP TIPS
How do you think trainees can influence the situation best to their advantage? ADVICE
What would you tell next year’s intake to make main placement as useful as possible? Thank you!!!!
References Brown, J., Doecke, B., & Loughran, J. (1997). Understanding beginning to teach, learning about the transition from tertiary education to a professional career /http://www.swin.edu.au/ aare/97pap/LOUGJ039.htmS. Burr, V., & Butt, T. W. (1997). Interview methodology and PCP. In P. Denicolo, & M. Pope (Eds.), Sharing understanding and practice (pp. 98–105). Farnborough: EPCA Publications. Calderhead, J., & Robson, M. (1991). Images of teaching: student teachers’ early conceptions of classroom practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 7(1), 1–8. Chambers, G. N., Coles, J., & Roper, T. (2002). Why students withdraw from PGCE courses. Language Learning Journal, 25, 52–58. Cole, M. (1996). Cultural psychology, a once and future discipline. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Dart, L., & Drake, P. (1993). School-based teacher training, a conservative practice? Journal of Education for Teaching, 19(2), 175–190. Day, C., Whitaker, P., & Wren, D. (1987). Appraisal and professional development in primary schools. Milton Keynes: Open University Press. Debolt, G. P. (Ed.). (1992). Teacher induction and mentoring: School-based collaborative programs. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Department for Education (DfE) (1992). Initial teacher training (secondary phase) (Circular 9/92). London: DES. Department for Education and Employment (DfEE) (1998). Teaching, high status, high standards. Standards for the award of Newly Qualified Teachers (Circular 4/98). London: Teacher Training Agency. Department for Education and Skills (DfES) (2002). Qualifying to teach. London: DES. Dunne, E., & Bennet, N. (1997). Mentoring processes in schoolbased training. British Educational Research Journal, 23(2), 225–236. Editorial. (2001). Cambridge Journal of Education, 31(1). Edwards, A., & Protheroe, L. (2003). Learning to see in classrooms, what student teachers learn about teaching and learning while learning to teach in schools? British Educational Research Journal, 29(2), 227–242. Edwards, A., & Protheroe, L. (2004). Teaching by proxy: Understanding how mentors are positioned in partnerships. Oxford Review of Education, 30(2), 183–197. Furlong, J., & Maynard, T. (1995). Mentoring student teachers: The growth of professional knowledge. London: Routledge.
1411
Graham, S. J., & Roberts, J. (2007). Student–teachers’ perspectives on positive and negative social processes in school. Teachers and Teaching, 13(4), 399–410. Gratch, A. (2001). The culture of teaching and beginning teaching development. Teacher Education Quarterly, 10, 121–136 Available (retrieved November 30, 2007) from /http://teqjournal.org/backvols/2001/28_4/v28n4_09.pdfS. Grenfell, M. (1998). Training teachers in practice. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Ltd. Grey, C. (1994). Career as a project of the self and labour process discipline. Sociology, 28(2), 479–497. Hargreaves, A. (1995). Realities of teaching. In L. W. Anderson (Ed.), International encyclopedia of teaching and teacher education (2nd ed., pp. 80–87). Cambridge, UK: Pergamon. Hodges, D. C. (1998). Participation as dis-identification with/in a community of practice. Mind, Culture and Activity, 5(4), 272–290. Hodkinson, H., & Hodkinson, P. (1999). Teaching to learn, learning to teach? School based non teaching activity in an initial teacher education and training partnership scheme. Teaching and Teacher Education, 15, 273–285. Hodkinson, H., & Hodkinson, P. (2002). Learning in a workplace community, secondary school teachers in their subject departments. In Paper presented at BERA annual conference 2002. Available from (retrieved November 30, 2007) /http:// www.tlrp.org/project%20sites/IILW/pr5%20E-BERA%2002% 20biogs.htmS. Johnston, S. (1994a). Experience is the best teacher: Or is it? An analysis of the role of experience in learning to teach. Journal of Teacher Education, 45(1), 199–208. Johnston, S. (1994b). Conversations with student teachers— Enhancing the dialogue of learning to teach. Teaching and Teacher Education, 10(1), 71–82. Jones, M. (2005). Fitting in, feeling excluded or opting out? An investigation into the socialisation process of newcomers to the teaching profession in secondary schools in England. Journal of In-service Education, 31, 509–526. Kagan, D. (1992). Professional growth among preservice and beginning teachers. Review of Educational Research, 62(2), 129–169. Kelly, G. A. (1955). The psychology of personal constructs, clinical diagnosis and psychotherapy, Vols. 1 and 2. New York: W.W. Norton & Co. Lacey, C. (1977). The socialization of teachers. London: Methuen. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Lloyd, M. (1999). ‘A long weekend’, a case study of student teachers’ experiences of a secondary PGCE course. Ph.D. thesis, University of Southampton. Lortie, D. (1975). Schoolteacher, a sociological study. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Mason, J. (1996). Qualitative researching. London: Sage. Maynard, T. (2001). The student teacher and the school community of practice, a consideration of learning as participation. Cambridge Journal of Education, 31(1), 39–52. McNally, J., Cope, P., Inglis, W., & Stronach, I. (1994). Current realities in the student teaching experience: A preliminary enquiry. Teaching and Teacher Education, 10(2), 219–230. Miles, A. M., & Huberman, M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis, an expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
ARTICLE IN PRESS 1412
J. Roberts, S. Graham / Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 1401–1412
Olson, M., & Osbourne, J. (1991). Learning to teach, the first year. Teaching and Teacher Education, 7, 331–343. Ozga, J. (2004). From research to policy and practice: Some issues in knowledge transfer. Centre for Education Sociology Briefing no. 31: University of Edinburgh. Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park: Sage. Pope, M. L., & Keen, T. R. (1981). Personal construct psychology and education. London: Academic Press. Roberts, J. (2003). Personal and professional identity re-construction of young mature trainees in the context of a PGCE course. Ph.D. thesis, University of Reading. Roberts, J. (2005). Role perceptions of trainees on main block practice, some themes. Unpublished training material, Institute of Education, University of Reading. Tabachnik, B. R., & Zeichner, K. (1988). The impact of student teaching experience on the development of teacher perspectives. Journal of Teacher Education, 35(6), 28–36. Tann, S. (1993). Eliciting student teachers’ personal theories. In J. Calderhead (Ed.), Conceptualizing reflection in teacher development. London: Falmer. Turney, C., Cairns, L. G., Eltis, K. J., Hatton, N., Thew, D. M., Towler, J., et al. (1982). The practicum in teacher
education: Research, practice and supervision. Adelaide: Sydney University Press. Vulliamy, G., & Yeh, Y.-C. (1998). The development of mentoring schemes for probationer and student teachers in Taiwan and England. Journal of In-Service Education, 24(2), 293–305. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Wu, J. (1998). School work environment and its impact on the professional competence of newly qualified teachers. Journal of In-service Education, 24, 213–225. Zeichner, K. M., & Gore, J. H. (1990). Teacher socialisation. In W. R. Houston, M. Huberman, & J. Sikula (Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher education (pp. 329–348). New York: Macmillan. Zeichner, K. M., Tabachnik, B. R., & Densmore, K. (1987). Individual, institutional and cultural influences on the development of teachers’ craft knowledge. In J. Calderhead (Ed.), Exploring teachers’ thinking (pp. 21–59). London: Cassell. Zuzovsky, R. (1995). Professional development of student teachers during preservice training. In R. Hoz, & M. Silberstein (Eds.), Partnerships of schools and institutions of higher education. Tel Aviv: Ben Gurion Press.